EOS 40D USER REPORT

You're on Page 3 of 4
Go to
  • Re: EOS 40D USER REPORT
    That's what I would do ;o)))))
  • Re: EOS 40D USER REPORT
    Sure, that makes sense IF you already have a DSLR in hand. I didn't anymore, having gone "tabula rasa" in well documented fashion ;o) I absolutely needed a decent SLR for weekend wanders aroudn Tokyo and for a forthcoming trip to Bangkok and yes...Burma at Xmas. No way will the 7D or whatever be out by then so I guess the 40D may turn out to be a "bridge" camera. But hey one could do a lot worse for a bridge cam... It is actually a very fine instrument, almost certainly the best of the crop that stated with the D60/D30/10D.... For imae quality do read what Reichmann has to say in The Luminous ALndscape (he's over the moon). Agree with Luko about shutter sound in absolute terms except that in the field, it is remarkably quiet and one thanks God for that...
  • Re: EOS 40D USER REPORT
    A quick look at prices on the eminently serviceable outfit B&H in New York delivers body only:

    XT (350D): 445$

    XTi(400D): 591$

    40D : 1299$ (went up 100$ since a couple weeks)

    5D : 2395$ (finally went down, and without rebate)

    Yes, maybe spend much less than 500$ and wait on the next pro-sumer generation next year. Xts are great back-up cameras on an outing, anyway.

    That's also plenty of money saved towards a macro, or a 70-200. I am a bit more a proud purchaser of an extra good lens than a camera. Is it wrong to think like this?
  • Re: EOS 40D USER REPORT
    You are absolutely right, Herve. You were probably wrong about the "sandal-clad Burmese soldier" I briefly uploaded before your argument caused me to give up on it (hee hee, couldn't resist bringing THAT up, OT and all...) but no here, you have a very good point.
    Then there is always Nikon, eh? Seriously there is a NIKON TSUNAMI about to come down like Katrina and drown out Canon's voice for a while - and if their high iso quality can hold up, Mama Mia!
    But if you are a Canon die-hard, a truster of the old Eos magic even in these Dark Times, Herve, then let us all wait for the Second Coming of the 5D, which bloody well better have the following:
    1. Far superior AF (using the 40D as a starting point and elaborating from there, a la legendary Eos 3, my brothers..)
    2. A larger LCD with MCUH higher resolution (NOT like the 40D, but like Sony and Nikon) - that's a no-brainer
    3. Speedier operation in general so captures are more "sure" and with more "bite".
    The 40D, despite Andrew's pixel peeping Jeremiads, is a splendid "Shooter's" cam - excellent for the street certainly and some PJ applications as well as weddings and all that stuff. I see it as a quick-sale "bridge", a kind of John The Baptist announcing... you know what (7D or whatever they call it.
    If Canon under-delivers with the 7D, they are in serious trouble, simple as that. The genius of the 40D is that they have a 3 month jump on the D300 and the thing (in spite of all that pixel peeping) is garnering excellent reviews and selling like hot cakes. The ONE-TWO punch from C has to be just that: a successful run of the 40D followed by 7D's grand entrance, huge fanfare, insanely great iso 6400 performance from the new chip.
    I never thought I'd say this (as a Ricoh man) but I fear a little for Canon these days. Man oh man...
  • Re: EOS 40D USER REPORT
    Thanks Francis for this (as usual) excellent overview of the 40D.
    Any chance that you will give us report on the G9 these coming weeks? ;o)
  • Re: EOS 40D USER REPORT
    we're talking 800$ difference between XT and 40D, It's enormous this year for me.

    I had dinner tonight with some of the best authorities on Burma in the travel writing business. Apparently, something almost happened at the top (which started about shooting or not shooting monks), which could have tipped the balance but the old guard prevailed.

    IMO, un feu de paille. ils s' entendent comme larrons en foire!
  • Re: EOS 40D USER REPORT
    a review conclusion from Anders Uschold's exhaustive lab tests from British Journal of Photography regarding Canon 40D (which is a very reliable source imho):

    "..The camera's processing strategy is very straight: good noise compensation, very high input dynamic range (he rates the dynamic range as 9.1 at ISO100 which - he says- is 'outstanding')and well balanced sharpening. The tonal reproductions targerts visual pleasentness and enhanced resolution. The autofocus and shutter delay are very good to excellent. But, of course, such a straight adaptation won't meet everyone's needs. Disadvantages are caused by the significantly altered tonal reproduction and fine detail artefacts. Accurate object photography and technical reproduction will be affected. Corner shading is often more visible, so the (free) lens correction software provided by Canon will be useful for advanced photographers..."
  • Re: EOS 40D USER REPORT
    Herve, I'd go for the 400D/XTi based on that. Actually I *did* go for the 400D/XTi based on that ;)

    I've used the 350D/XT a fair amount (my brother has one), and the AF isn't as good, the buffer isn't as big, and the screen isn't as good. The 350D/XT also lacks the dust reduction system and RGB histograms of the 400D/XTi.

    The only trick is that the 350D/XT has slightly better per-pixel sharpness than the 400D/XTi; so whilst the number of pixels is higher, I don't feel the amount of detail captured is significantly higher. That said the 400D is slightly cleaner at high ISOs, and has slightly more dynamic range.

    For me the only feature of the 40D I really would find particularly useful is the magnified live view; I occasionally try astrophotography, and I have an interest in macro, but if you don't, it's probably not worthwile for you.
  • Detailed review on DPreview.com
    Here we go peeps!
    The beast won't have any secret left after you read this!
    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos40d/
    Nicolas
  • Re: Detailed review on DPreview.com
    It is positive, of course, but written in very reluctant language, betraying Phil's bias toward Nikon. He will NOT acknowledge, for example, what everybody knows, that above 400iso, the D200 is frighteningly noisy. Says IQ is very close and all, which is patent nonsense. Normally a camera as good (in real life shooting and handling) as the 40D would bring out more enthusiasm, especially in the conclusion. But no... I am not the only one by the way who feels like this (many have already said the same thing in the DP threads).